Saturday, July 18, 2015

Met Saba Esber Responds to the Patriarchate of Jerusalem's Statement

Arabic original here. English translation taken from the Patriarchate of Antioch's facebook page here.This is in response to the statement issued by the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, which can be read here.

Your Pardon, my Christ!

A few days ago, the Orthodox
Patriarchate of Jerusalem published a statement "sincerely and
truthfully informing the sister Orthodox Churches and its flock" of
certain points that contain no truth about its attack on territory
canonically and historically belonging to the pastoral care of the
Patriarchate of Antioch according to Orthodox order. The first item
summarizes the history of the emergence of the Qatar parish until the
naming of an archbishop for it. It says in the beginning of the historical
narrative that it "responded to an invitation by the Christians of
Qatar, a geographical territory within its ecclesiastical jurisdiction,"
while in reality it is part of "All the East", the title of the
Patriarchate of Antioch since the establishment of the first five
Apostolic Patriarchates.

Every observer of Church history knows
that the Fathers of the Fourth Ecumenical Council, held in Chalcedon in
451, decided "out of reverence for the Lord's Passion and Resurrection"
to elevate the city of Jerusalem, which at the time was a bishopric
subject to the Patriarchate of Antioch, to the rank of patriarchate.
Over the course of time, Antioch gave her some of her bishopric so that
she could have a patriarchal existence. We could mention, for example,
that Haifa remained a bishopric of Antioch until the 18th century.

The statement mentions that services for the Christians of Qatar began
"in house churches" and that "the Patriarchate of Antioch had no
presence" there. The least that can be said about this is that it is a
truth meant to express a falsehood. Services began in homes--
specifically in the home of the American ambassador, who at that time
was Orthodox--because Qatar had not yet started to permit Christian
religious services. This is what prevented the Church of Antioch, in the
person of the shepherd of the diocese overseeing Qatar, Metropolitan
Constantine Papastephanou, from providing regular liturgical services.
However, he made numerous visits to Qatar, during which he held
liturgical services.

If the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, with the
support of the American ambassador, was for years only able to provide
regular liturgical services in homes and not in a designated building,
then how can she allow herself to admonish her sister Church of Antioch
and appropriate what is hers? Does not ecclesiastical, canonical and
brotherly practice-- not to simply say love-- not require her to ask
permission to provide religious services for the faithful living in that
country, as the Russian Church did when she sought permission from her
sister Church of Antioch to build a church in Sharjah for the Russians
who are very numerous in the United Arab Emirates? And this is indeed
what happened. Today, at liturgies in the UAE, the Russian priest, in
accordance with Orthodox tradition, commemorates the Patriarch of
Antioch alongside the Russian Patriarch, which is recognition on the
part of his church that it is serving faithful on Antiochian territory.
Then, we should wonder whether providing religious services to the
faithful through a priest, a brother from a sister church, gives this
church the right to consider the territory her own, to consecrate a
bishop for it and to regard it as a dependency? Such a thing only
happens between conflicting colonial powers!

In addition to this,
it accuses the Antiochian Church of ethno-phyletism, when she is the
one which serves all Orthodox found in the Gulf coming from various
nationalities, using Arabic, Greek and sometimes Russian and Romanian in
the Divine Liturgy. In North America and Australia, she uses English
and the proportion of converts of non-Arab background is reaching fifty
percent. In South and Central America, the divine services have long
been translated into Spanish and Portuguese.
The Church of
Antioch, which God has preserved from the temptation of ethno-phyletism
and is acclaimed worldwide for the significant role she continues to
play in realizing Orthodox ecclesiology, is falsely and slanderously
accused in this statement of "placing the question on an ethnic-racial
basis." Go ahead and laugh. We've really reached the end of times!
You'll laugh even more when you learn that Jerusalem's statement bases
its accusation on a letter that does not exist, attributed to Patriarch
John X, that puts into his mouth words that no Orthodox person with
even a modicum of sanity has ever said. They claim that he is demanding
pastoral oversight of the Orthodox in Qatar because he "represents the
Orthodox Community in all Arab countries, including for example Iraq,
Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Jerusalem, Egypt, Bahrain, the Emirates, Iran."
Is Iran an Arab country? We hadn't heard about this. They've exchanged
Persian for another language!

Likewise anyone who is in the least
familiar with ecclesial reality knows that Egypt and all Africa belongs
to the Patriarchate of Alexandria whose foundation is attributed to the
Holy Evangelist Mark and is an ancient, apostolic patriarchate having
the second place after Rome, before the foundation of Constantinople,
which it continues to hold today among the Orthodox. As such, it goes
ahead of Antioch, which holds the third place among the Orthodox.

As for the Patriarchate of Jerusalem, she cares for the city of
Jerusalem and, as we mentioned above, was with time given by Antioch
bishoprics in present-day Palestine and Jordan. Among them are ten
bishoprics in present-day Jordanian territory that belonged to the
diocese of Bosra, which the Patriarch of Jerusalem suddenly woke up and
started regarding as belonging to his patriarchate.
If not for the need to defend the right and honor of the Church, we would shy away from talking about these shameful realities.

The most hurtful thing is the false accusation that the Patriarchate of
Antioch is lying. This is unprecedented behavior even for countries in
conflict with each other, so how can it happen in the Church of Jesus
Christ? The statement goes so far as to deny the agreement that was
reached in Athens at the Greek Foreign Ministry in early summer 2014.
Even uglier than that, it invokes "the testimony of the delegates of the
Ecumenical Patriarchate and of the Directorate for Churches" of course
to confirm the non-existence of this agreement, which was announced at that time in the Greek media.

How far has the Church of
Jerusalem, the "Mother of Churches", sunk and why is there this frantic
effort to occupy the territory of a sister church?! Instead of
practicing the words of the Apostle, "Who is weak, and I do not feel
weak?" we find our brother practicing the following saying: "Who is weak
and I do not devour him?" It is really a bitter farce, in the face of
which words are useless. Whoever said, "Among the Orthodox, active love
has become a dull tune," was right. It is no wonder then, that the other
religious communities have become a haven for those fleeing the hell of
those who claim to be the "Mother of Churches". You are truly a
stranger and an outcast in Your own Church, O Lord!

Worst of all,
the statement closes by declaring kindness and gentleness that impose
continued "commemoration of the sister Orthodox Church of Antioch, for
the sake of the unity of the Orthodox Church." As if the unity of the
Church were a superficial unity achieved through commemoration alone,
apart from truth and love. What unity is this apart from truth!? What
unity is this in falsehood and slander?! What unity is this through
bullying, using every means that belongs to this world, except the true
Gospel of Jesus Christ!?